Friday, September 29, 2017

Doctrine of Necessity from CJ Munir to Judge Khosa: Role of Judiciary in the Service of Neocolonialism

Doctrine of Necessity ver 2.0: SC Judge Khosa (2017) "To do a great right, do a little wrong"!
Doctrine of Necessity ver 1.0: SC CJ Munir (1954) "Necessity makes lawful that which is unlawful".

Doctrine of Necessity Ver 1.0: During 63 years from 1954 to 2016 had sent home 15 prime ministers, imposed 4 martial laws, and slapped on Pakistanis dictatorial rule of over 35+ years in the service of neo-colonialism which has been detailed in my post on Costs of Justice Munir's Doctrine of Necessity: 4 Martial Laws and 35 years of dictatorships.

Doctrine of Necessity ver 2.0: As per the comments of Judge Khosa and Judge Ejaz Afzal would be remembered for decades and centuries made during the hearing of Panama Case Judgement. The questions are (1) How many PMs will it depose? (2) How many martial laws will it germinate? (3) How many years of dictatorial reign will it perpetuate???

Parallel of Judge Khosa's Point of View with CJ Munir's Doctrine of Necessity 

  • Need for a "Great Right" is always an immediate "Necessity". In a developing country fighting perpetually for its survival and always going from one life threatening emergency to another, savior's on horseback aided by creative judges will always find a "necessity" to serve a "great right". 
  • If necessity can turn "unlawful into lawful", then a "little wrong" can always be committed for obtaining a "great right"!
  • What quantifiable measure can determine some "necessity" as "unavoidable" and what measurement can turn some "right" into a "great" right?
  • Who determines "necessity" and who determines "great right" is a fundamental question? Should a few un-elected judges decide what is the "necessity" and what is the "great right"?
  • Is deciding in favor of "wrong" and "unlawful"    the prerogative of the judiciary? Is serving a "great right" and "necessity" when it is neither constitutional nor lawful their mandate?
  • Judges should strictly decide on the basis of law and constitution by remaining strictly within it's bounds. Changing a constitution is always the right of the people. However, neocolonialism dictates that this right should never be given to the people to decide. It should always be usurped through military Dictators or their handmaiden judiciary (see details below).
  • The dominant view of neocolonialism is that people are unworthy of deciding about what is right and what is wrong. What is necessity and what is not. This right has to be decided by the legacy of the colonial raj as enshrined in the unelected elites and powers of the status quo. Our history tells us about this un-holy alliance of the judiciary, military and the educated elites in disenfranchising the people. 
  • Doctrine of necessity and the hidden status quo powers have been making this decision of deposing our elected prime-ministers. None of the elected prime ministers have been allowed to complete their term. See my post: Why no PM of Pakistan has ever completed his/her tenure?
  • Destiny of Neo-colonial Pakistan appears to be a series of governments where the hidden status quo forces of neocolonialism dictate the decisions either as a first umpire or the second umpire or the third umpire. Even in an apparent civilian rule, it all depends upon the third umpire lifting his finger to fold up the setup. The 3rd umpire famosly did not lift the finger in 2014 despite Imran Khan waiting for it on the container [1,2,3], but eventually did in 2017 through their old and trusted allies, the judiciary.  

neo-colonialism or neo-imperialism is the practice of using capitalism, globalization and cultural imperialism to influence a developing country in lieu of direct military control (imperialism) or indirect political control (hegemony). It was coined by Kwame Nkrumah in the context of African countries undergoing decolonization in the 1960s. 

In Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism, Kwame Nkrumah wrote:

In place of colonialism, as the main instrument of imperialism, we have today neo-colonialism . . . [which] like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries. . . .

The result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed parts of the world. Investment, under neo-colonialism, increases, rather than decreases, the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. The struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.[5]

To Do a Great Right, Do a Little Wrong

Judge Khosa quoting Christopher Marlowe and then Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice admits that his judgement is like Bassanio to Portia saying "To do a great right, do a little wrong”! Pp 169-170 from April 20, 2017 SC Judgement is reproduced below:
[Begin Excerpt]
The precedent to be set by this Court through the present petitions should in fact be a warning to all those rulers who try to subjugate all the organs of power, enslave the institutions of accountability and then in a false sense of security and invincibility proclaim as Christopher Marlowe’s ‘Tamburlaine’ did by boasting that

“I hold the Fates bound fast in iron chains,
And with my hand turn Fortune's wheel about,
And sooner shall the sun fall from his sphere
Than Tamburlaine be slain or overcome.”

While dwelling on the subject of setting a dangerous precedent by a court of law I am also reminded of the old bard William Shakespeare. The power of literature for commenting upon a reality through the medium of fiction is fascinating and an amazing example of the same is the following part of Shakespeare’s play Merchant of Venice which, though written hundreds of years ago in foreign climes, appears to have been written for nothing but the present case being handled by us in a different millennium and in a different continent. While trying to avoid execution of an
oppressive judicial decree regarding payment of money by another Bassanio beseeched the Duke as follows:
“Yes, here I tender it for him in the court;
Yea, twice the sum: if that will not suffice,
I will be bound to pay it ten times o'er,
On forfeit of my hands, my head, my heart:
If this will not suffice, it must appear
That malice bears down truth. And I beseech you,
Wrest once the law to your authority:
To do a great right, do a little wrong,
And curb this cruel devil of his will.” 
which imploring was immediately retorted by Portia in the following strong words:
“It must not be; there is no power in Venice
Can alter a decree established:
'Twill be recorded for a precedent,
And many an error by the same example
Will rush into the state: it cannot be.”
and then what happened to that decree is another story. The punch lines in the above mentioned excerpt appear to be “Wrest once the law to your authority: To do a great right, do a little wrong”.  
Fortunately for me, there is no wresting the law to me authority and no little wrong is to be done by me to do a great right in the matter of issuing a declaration against respondent No. 1 because the original jurisdiction of this Court under Article 184(3)........
[End Excerpt]

See Other Posts on Panama Case Judgement:  

Sunday, September 24, 2017

Myth: Government Universities Cost Less than Private Universities

This post explores the myth that Public Universities Cost Lower than Private Universities. I think the average cost per student per year of a public university is much more than that of a private university. Given below is a preliminary analysis. A more detailed analysis is required.

2005-2006 Analysis of Public sector universities indicates that:
  • HEC funding per student (2005-6) ~ Rs 75 k 
  • Additional fees paid per year per student
    • Typical fee: ~ 25 k (For universities like KU) 
    • Exorbitantly: ~ 150 k (IBA, NUST) 
  • Total Average cost per year = 100k – 225k 
  • Land acquisition and capital investment through PC-1s and other external funds would be extra and would amount to hundred of millions of rupees of funding per year to each public sector university.
Private Sector HEIs in 2005-06 in Karachi were typically costing a student less than Rs. 100 k. Mind you these universities took not a single penny from the tax money collected from the poor!

In 2012, the average cost per student per year had climbed up for many public sector universities to over Rs. 200k. Whereas, many private sector universities in Karachi had fees around half. Remember, this would include operational costs as well as capital costs. Whereas the Rs.200k per student per year operational
costs of public sector universities does not include capital and development costs, which is an additional tab to be picked up by the poor taxpayers.

According to the budget documents Rs 79.5 billion has also been earmarked for Higher Education Commission (HEC) including Rs 21.5 billion under the Public Sector Development Program (PSDP) and Rs 58 billion on account of current expenditure, showing an increase of 13 percent as compared to Rs 51 billion earmarked for 2015-16. [1]

The amount comes to around Rs 200k per student for on-campus students of government universities. Please note that this does not include the land grants and other allocations. This is directly from the federal budget.

The per student cost of a government university must also include the cost of all the officials of all the ministries responsible for making the government universities work. This cost should also include:
  1. Cost of HEC personnel, administration, staff and operational costs responsible for calculating, approving, sanctioning, monitoring of any funding requirements for the government universities.
  2. Cost of all the accreditation bodies for Engineering (PEC), Business (NBAEC), Computer Science etc. I think currently there are over ten such bodies and many others are in the process of formation. Their operational costs must be computed and distributed over the public universities. This function in US and other countries is typically performed by independent professional bodies with little or no tax money involved. 
  3. Cost of Ministry of Finance, AGPR, Planning Commission and other ministries responsible for disbursements of operational budgets, pensions, sanctioning and monitoring of PC-1s and their funds, decision making etc. 
  4. Cost of provincial departments and Governor secretariat's responsible for sanctioning of leaves, appointments, projects planning etc. 
  5. Cost of all the capital investments through land allocations, grants, funds through other government agencies. 
  6. Cost of all the USAID and development funds loans and advances along with their interest payments
You add up all these costs and you will find out that the total cost per student per year, can come out to be at least ten times the per student cost of the private universities. Please note once again the private universities are not using the tax money of the poor people.

Now the justification of all these costs is on the basis of social equality and equal opportunity for the poor people of Pakistan. There are two major arguments:
  1. There are many public universities whose fees are much more than several private universities. This should not be allowed. Example, IBA's cost is Rs 150k per semester which is much more than most private sector universities. 
  2. Why can't the government calculate all the money that it is spending on the public universities divide it by the number of poor students that it wants to support and give that as a hardship scholarship vouchers to the poor students. Let the poor students shop around for a university that would let them study with that voucher. I think this may be a more equitable distribution of money. It would then be channeled to the more efficient universities who can give the best quality for the least amount of money. This is how the market dynamics play out. 

[1] Report

This write-up is an extended rehash of the ideas presented in a talk on "Five Major Myths of Higher Education" made at the CIO Conference, March 2009 at Sheraton, Karachi. See another link

Presentation originally made at CIO Conference, March 2009 at Sheraton, Karachi.
The links and write-up below is an extended rehash of those thoughts:

5 Myths of Higher Education in Pakistan

  • Presentation originally made at CIO Conference, March 2009 at Sheraton, Karachi.
  • The links and write-up below is an extended rehash of those thoughts:
Myth #1: Our backwardness is because we lag behind in Science and Technology
Myth #2: There is mushrooming of Higher Education Institutions in Pakistan
Myth #3: Impact Factor research measures real impact
Myth#4: Public universities cost lower than private universities 
Myth#5: Bigger infrastructure (land, building, equipment) means better education

Sunday, September 3, 2017

How Readers are Created. Ecosystem that Produces Readers

How can we create readers and an ecosystem where readers can thrive. How do we make reading a contagious disease when our educational institutions from schools to universities have become mass producers of functional illiterates [1]. Universities complain that they are getting intake that has studied English for 12 years but have no reading comprehension and no expression. The employers are complaining that graduates coming out of the universities can not even write a single page of correct English. This is a dismal situation. How come we are producing functional Illiterates who are defined as people who know how to read but are not readers, and those who know how to write but are not writers! How can we reverse this?

Friday, September 1, 2017

How Literature Review of a PhD Dissertation Presents the State of the Art: Synthesis vs Listing

Quality of literature review is what majorly differentiates a PhD Thesis from an MS Thesis. The qualitative difference is in the digestion and synthesis of the existing work into a framework on which your research contribution and sequence can stand. This synthesis of existing work in the topic area should itself be worthy of a publication. Digestion of the existing papers is represented by a list of factors or parameters that you have identified on which you can compare and and contrast the existing literature. Not all parameters are relevant to all the papers. Hence, parameters are separated into different subsets. For each subset, a table can be constructed through which papers relevant to the subset parameters can be compared and contrasted. Analysis of these parameters provide you with the explanation of the gap or the problem area which is then articulated in the form of a problem statement.